Papers › BLEnD: A Benchmark for LLMs on Everyday Knowledge in Diverse Cultures and Languages

BLEnD: A Benchmark for LLMs on Everyday Knowledge in Diverse Cultures and Languages

14 Jun 2024arXiv:2406.09948archive 2025-07-28

Junho Myung, Nayeon Lee, Yi Zhou, Jiho Jin, Rifki Afina Putri, Dimosthenis Antypas, Hsuvas Borkakoty, Eunsu Kim, Carla Perez-Almendros, Abinew Ali Ayele, Víctor Gutiérrez-Basulto, Yazmín Ibáñez-García, Hwaran Lee, Shamsuddeen Hassan Muhammad, Kiwoong Park, Anar Sabuhi Rzayev, Nina White, Seid Muhie Yimam, Mohammad Taher Pilehvar, Nedjma Ousidhoum, Jose Camacho-Collados, Alice Oh

Large language models (LLMs) often lack culture-specific knowledge of daily life, especially across diverse regions and non-English languages. Existing benchmarks for evaluating LLMs' cultural sensitivities are limited to a single language or collected from online sources such as Wikipedia, which do not reflect the mundane everyday lifestyles of diverse regions. That is, information about the food people eat for their birthday celebrations, spices they typically use, musical instruments youngsters play, or the sports they practice in school is common cultural knowledge but uncommon in easily collected online sources, especially for underrepresented cultures. To address this issue, we introduce BLEnD, a hand-crafted benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' everyday knowledge across diverse cultures and languages. BLEnD comprises 52.6k question-answer pairs from 16 countries/regions, in 13 different languages, including low-resource ones such as Amharic, Assamese, Azerbaijani, Hausa, and Sundanese. We construct the benchmark to include two formats of questions: short-answer and multiple-choice. We show that LLMs perform better for cultures that are highly represented online, with a maximum 57.34% difference in GPT-4, the best-performing model, in the short-answer format. For cultures represented by mid-to-high-resource languages, LLMs perform better in their local languages, but for cultures represented by low-resource languages, LLMs perform better in English than the local languages. We make our dataset publicly available at: https://github.com/nlee0212/BLEnD.

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2406.09948")

Code

Syntology Ran 1 of 10 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 9 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong.

By repository: official repository: 10 samples from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

nlee0212/blend officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

10 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 9 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

1ran · our draft was wrong
9unverified

Licence: 10 of the 10 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from nlee0212/BLEnD. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

make_prompt nlee0212/BLEnD/model_inference.py official repository ran · our draft was wrong no licence file found · pointer only · debb9aac44c9ee82 · report
another_similar_term nlee0212/blend/evaluation/multiple_choice_generation.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · b07eb0f356a3585d · report
filter_mc_questions nlee0212/blend/evaluation/multiple_choice_generation.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 7357159fccfa2aba · report
get_annotations nlee0212/blend/evaluation/evaluation_utils.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 2a74de03f6298de8 · report
get_model_response_file nlee0212/blend/evaluation/evaluation_utils.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 279dc2da23c1b9d4 · report
get_questions nlee0212/blend/evaluation/evaluation_utils.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · ad8827896937a543 · report
get_tokenizer_model nlee0212/blend/utils.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · c965cef76da20698 · report
hard_exact_match nlee0212/blend/evaluation/exact_match.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 545867f1e85a719d · report
multiple_choice_score nlee0212/BLEnD/evaluation/multiple_choice_evaluation.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 88cda0047758f947 · report
no_common_word nlee0212/blend/evaluation/multiple_choice_generation.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 9e492800c5aabae0 · report

Tasks

Multiple-choice

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Absolute Position EncodingsAdamAttentionBPEDense ConnectionsDropoutGPT-4Label SmoothingLayer NormalizationLinear LayerMulti-Head AttentionPosition-Wise Feed-Forward LayerResidual ConnectionSoftmaxTransformer

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections